Prevention of homelessness duties: consultation analysis

1. Introduction

Background

In September 2017, the First Minister set out a new commitment to eradicate rough sleeping, transform the use of temporary accommodation in Scotland and end homelessness. Ministers established the Homelessness and Rough Sleeping Action Group (HARSAG) to make recommendations on how these changes could be achieved. In November 2018, the Scottish Government (SG) and COSLA (Convention of Scottish Local Authorities) responded to HARSAG's recommendations with the Ending Homelessness Together action plan (updated in October 2020) which sets out the actions they will take in partnership with others.

A key action was to develop wide-reaching prevention duties. At the request of Scottish Government, Crisis convened the Prevention Review Group (PRG) to develop recommendations for legal duties on Scottish local authorities and wider public bodies^[1] to prevent homelessness, and how these might be best implemented.

The recommendations in the final report of the Prevention Review Group, Preventing Homelessness in Scotland published in early 2021, provided the framework for the prevention of homelessness duties consultation. The joint SG/COSLA consultation on Prevention of Homelessness Duties was open from 17 December 2021 to 8 April 2022 and asked 108 questions, inviting views in two broad areas^[2]:

• Introducing new duties on public bodies and landlords to prevent homelessness, particularly by asking and acting on a risk of homelessness, as well as responsibilities relating to strategic and joint planning.
• Changing existing homelessness legislation to ensure homelessness is prevented earlier, including a proposal to extend the duty to take reasonable steps to prevent homelessness up to six months before it occurs, to maximise the housing options available to people and to prescribe what actions reasonable steps may include.

The consultation is an opportunity for the Scottish Government to understand a wide variety of stakeholders' views on the proposals, which will shape the final duties to be included in a forthcoming Housing Bill.

Profile of respondents

In total, 113 consultation responses were received. Most were submitted via the online consultation platform, Citizen Space. Those received in an alternative format, for example, a PDF document, were entered into Citizen Space by the Scottish Government. Individuals provided 20 responses to the consultation; the remaining 93 were from organisations. Appendix C details the profile of organisations that took part in the consultation. The largest share of organisational responses came from local authorities (29), health and social care (22) and the third sector (20). During the consultation process, the Scottish Government held six engagement events with stakeholders. The points raised during these events are included in this analysis.

Analysis approach

The Lines Between was commissioned to provide robust, independent analysis of the consultation responses. This report presents the range of views expressed by consultation respondents under each section of the consultation document. A public consultation means anyone can express their views; individuals and organisations with an interest in the topic are more likely to respond than those without. This self-selection means the respondents' views do not necessarily represent of the views of the population.

Quantitative analysis

There were 52 closed questions in the consultation. However, because respondents did not answer every question, the quantitative analysis presented in this report is based on those who did answer. A full breakdown of the number and percentage response to each question is in Appendix B.

Qualitative analysis

Qualitative analysis outlines the key themes identified in responses to each question. The analyst team coded each response against a coding framework which was developed based on a review of the consultation questions and a sample of responses. In a small number of instances where alternative format responses contained information that did not align to specific questions, analysts exercised judgement about the most relevant place to include this material for analysis purposes.

A few organisations provided very detailed responses relating to their expertise. There is not scope in this report to fully summarise these responses; however, the responses are referenced where possible. Where appropriate, quotes from individuals and organisations are included to illustrate key points and to provide useful examples, insights and contextual information. Full responses to the consultation, where permission for publication was granted, can be found on the Scottish Government's website; specific points from those who did not give permission for publication are marked as anonymous in this report.

Weight of opinion

While qualitative analysis of open-ended questions does not permit the quantification of results, we signify the weight of a particular view using the following framework which indicates which are the most common or prevalent themes across responses:

• The most common / second most common theme; the most frequently identified.
• Many respondents; more than 30, another prevalent theme.
• Several respondents; 10-29, a recurring theme.
• Some respondents; 5-9, another theme.
• A few / a small number of respondents; <5, a less commonly mentioned theme.
• Two/one respondents; a singular comment or a view identified in two responses.